YALSA's position paper was adopted at their Monday Board meeting, and is endorsed by the ALA Intellectual Freedom Committee. Our ALSC Intellectual Freedom committee also supports this position in spirit.

Recognizing the paper's call to all library staff to ensure teen's intellectual freedom rights, the position would be strengthened by further dissemination and endorsement. Let's discuss potential ALSC support, and what form it might take. Should ALSC formally support this position and call upon our members to use the resources within to fulfill its charge?

The announced FBI plans to which this YALSA position responds would disproportionately target the informatin-seeking behaviours of "at risk" youth--coded language for non-white, non-wealthy youth. The YALSA position is clear in its demonstration that no evidence exists to suggest these youth are more susceptible than their peers to having access to any information turn into extremism or terrorist sympathising. What we do know, however, is that the youth populations deemed "at risk" in this plan are typically more reliant on public internet access--at school and at public libraries--to meet their information needs. Asking school and library personnel to monitor and report on the information behaviours of students who rely on our access points disproportionately targets these youth for surveillance and potential persecution while their peers with reliable at-home access are free from supposition and interference.

Additionally, as stated in the position, this level of surveillance of information access and use--especially when applied so subjectively--is in diametric opposition to core library values and ethics as well as those of ALSC. We opposed the Patriot Act's aims to use information behaviours as grounds for unfounded suspicion and persecution, and this FBI plan presents an intention to apply these same tactics to minors who are without the same levels of franchise as adults. ALSC should endorse this YALSA position--not only because those in our stated service population of youth ages 0-14 would be affected, but because our values for upholding free access to information and ideas require it.

I am in favor of endorsing the statement and determining strategies to ensure that our members and all youth services library staff are knowledgeable and equipped to uphold the rights to privacy of those we serve, as well as the threats to those rights. I imagine this is an area in which our Intellectual Freedom and Public Awareness Committees could work together swiftly and effectively.

I echo Amy's beautiful articulation of why ALSC should stand strongly with YALSA and endorse the division's position on privacy, surveillance, and the information-seeking rights of youth (and all people, frankly).

Moreover, there has never been a better time to advocate for our school library colleagues and their critical roles in helping young people become 21st-century learners, thinkers, and leaders. During our strategic planning sessions in Atlanta, we discussed the many ways we can integrate our support for school librarians into our spheres of influence. Let's start now with this immense opportunity.

Warmest regards,

Jenna

Jenna Nemec-LoiseDivision CouncilorAssociation for Library Service to Children

The proposed FBI guidelines sound alarmingly like the Patriot Act on steroids.I concur with what Amy and Jenna have already so eloquently stated. We need to take a stand, with YALSA against these intrusions to privacy and the harassment of already marginalized individuals.However...having spent 35 years as a librarian in a public school, I know that schools routinely require everyone (staff and students) who uses the internet on school premises sign an acceptable use policy that states that your usage can be tracked. I don't think that most districts do this in practice--it would take inordinate resources and staff time--but they can. And it would not surprise me if many school boards and districts caved to this FBI request, because the government can withhold funding if they don't comply.That said, I wholly agree with adding ALSC's name in support of this position paper. It's important to do what we can to protect these teens--and ultimately all of us.

Thanks to Amy for articulating the situation so well! I strongly support the position paper as well as Amy's suggestion, made at the conclusion of her comments, that the ALSC and YALSA Intellectual Freedom Committees work in tandem to quickly spread the word about these resources. We need as many members as possible of both divisions to be up to speed on both the threat and ways of that public libraries can counter it.

Thanks for these wonderfully articulated statements. I fully agree with supporting YALSA's position paper and I like the suggestions made to support both ALSC members and to use this opportunity to advocate for our school library colleagues.

Since the new FBI guidelines seem to have gone into effect a year ago, I wonder if there is any additional information about what has been happening under these guidelines that could help inform our next steps.

Let me join the chorus of support. Thanks, Amy for stating the situation so clearly and succinctly. I also appreciate Jenna's recognition of the value of supporting and advocating for our colleagues in school libraries. I agree that ALSC should support YALSA's position paper and look forward to additional discussion about how we can best move forward.

Thank you all who've articulated reasons for ALSC supporting this position paper.

I want to invite thoughts on how best to frame a motion, for impact. We can simply move and vote to endorse the statement, and take action outside the vote to ensure the charge is carried to our members. However, it seems to me that embedding our call to action within a motion would itself be a strong statement and action. Pulling from some of Amy's language above, a possibility could be:

"Moves that: ALSC endorses "The Library's Role in Protecting Teen Privacy: a YALSA position paper" and will ensure that our members and all youth services library staff are knowledgeable and equipped to uphold the rights to privacy of those we serve."

That is a tall order, but well within our core purpose, and YALSA has done excellent work in the "equipping" part through their paper. I agree that our IF and Public Awareness committees could take on this charge, collaborating with others (Education, Managing Children's Services, etc.) as needed.

I think we might consider whether "ensure that our members..." is the best language for a motion. While I LOVE the sentiment, I worry that it can be interpreted as vague, or alternately as impossible (how can we actually measure whether all staff have this knowledge, for instance?). Perhaps something along the lines of:

"Moves that: ALSC endorses "The Library's Role in Protecting Teen Privacy: a YALSA position paper" and will work with existing ALSC committees to communicate to our members and all youth services library staff the knowledge and strategies to uphold the rights to privacy of those we serve."

I had a hard time logging into Connect yesterday; perhaps you as well. I'd like to pick up here and ask whether there is any further discussion needed, or whether we can entertain a motion. (Amy has one drafted above).

I would suggest a small edit:"Moves that: ALSC endorses "The Library's Role in Protecting Teen Privacy: a YALSA position paper" and will work with existing ALSC committees to communicate to our members and, via them, other [or perhaps "nonmember"] [all – delete, as we do not have the capacity to reach ALL] youth services library staff the knowledge and strategies to uphold the rights to privacy of those we serve."

But that's wordsmithing, which I tend to do first thing. I have a broader question, and that's whether we need at this point to develop a plan for this communication and how to determine which knowledge and strategies we want to communicate? Or can we approve some sort of motion and then move into putting it in action? VickyOn Tue,

If we, as the board, have the knowledge and confidence that this can be implemented, we do not have to have a detailed plan before proceeding. There are several committees that jump to my mind (Public Awareness, Intellectual Freedom, Education) that would be obvious route to disseminate the "knowledge and strategies." Note that YALSA has amply identified and detailed resources for us to begin this.

I would argue that we can reach beyond our membership; we do already through our blog and media, and the statement itself is intended to reach a broader audience.

If we, as the board, have the knowledge and confidence that this can be implemented, we do not have to have a detailed plan before proceeding. There are several committees that jump to my mind (Public Awareness, Intellectual Freedom, Education) that would be obvious route to disseminate the "knowledge and strategies." Note that YALSA has amply identified and detailed resources for us to begin this.

I would argue that we can reach beyond our membership; we do already through our blog and media, and the statement itself is intended to reach a broader audience.

That's a relief, that we don't have to have a detailed plan. Given our timeline, it was daunting to imagine coming up with one. I also agree that we have a reach beyond our membership, but "all" is probably beyond it. I know a depressing number of unconnected children's librarians. Mind you, I won't stake my vote on the removal of "all"; but it is my job to be as precise as possible. It's your bad luck that I'm bringing it to this table. Sorry!

I like Vicky's proposed motion, which gets at something I was having a hard time articulating earlier regarding whether we have the capacity to reach (and know if we've reached) "all" folks:

"Moves that: ALSC endorses "The Library's Role in Protecting Teen Privacy: a YALSA position paper" and will work with existing ALSC committees to communicate to our members and other youth services library staff the knowledge and strategies to uphold the rights to privacy of those we serve."

I move that ALSC endorse "The Library's Role in Protecting Teen Privacy: a YALSA position paper" and work with existing ALSC committees to communicate to our members and other youth services library staff the knowledge and strategies to uphold the rights to privacy of those we serve.

Thank you for the discussion and voting on the YALSA position paper, which is an important one for ALSC to make a statement on.

We anticipate seeing many more statements from ALA, and from divisions, asserting the responsibilities of libraries in response to federal executive orders. In support of our membership and our mission, the ALSC Executive Committee has discussed the importance of amplifying these statements with a swift ALSC endorsement and sharing of the message, whenever the statement sits within ALSC’s core values .

As we’ve experienced from the YALSA position paper discussion, our usual mode of online board meeting in endorsing a statement is not “nimble.” It has taken approximately a week. They need not all be the exactly like this: we talked through a strong and specific statement to accompany this endorsement; we could simply have proposed endorsement without further statement. Still, calling the quorum, proceeding with appropriate discussion, and following Roberts Rules for establishing a motion, etc., involves many steps which consume a fair amount of my attention especially when there is the need to move the meeting swiftly.

I would like for us now to discuss endorsing current statements coming from ALA as we would take a “consent agenda”. This involves me taking a stronger leading hand, so I want to make sure we have agreement about the reasons and conditions for doing it this way, and on your opportunity and responsibility for checking it if necessary. I’ve discussed this scenario briefly with the ALSC Executive Committee:

Nina’s Proposal for “Consent” endorsement of Statements:

When a statement is released from ALA or a Division that sits within ALSCs core values, even if tangential to our focus, and has urgency, I will post it to Connect by simultaneously calling a meeting to order, and bringing a simple motion myself “to endorse” the statement.

I will then invite Board Members to indicate your presence by stating simply if you are "in favor" (with the first one joining to “second” the motion), or by posting a comment if you feel this item needs discussion.

Within 24 hours, those comments (if they constitute a quorum, or as soon after 24hrs as a quorum is established) will constitute the vote.

If there is consensus to endorse, it is endorsed; if not we can proceed with discussion and a regularly formatted meeting.

In this proposal I could simply post a statement for endorsement, and 24hrs later check for its passage, or further discussion. As with our consent agenda at Board Meetings, the procedures relies upon each of you to call out the item for further discussion if you feel it is necessary, and for that I’d ask you to keep your “knowledge-based decision-making” guidelines at hand:

The ALSC Board must embrace knowledge-based decision-making to be most effective, and for each issue we ask ourselves:

What do we know about the needs, wants, and preferences of ALSC members/prospective members/stakeholders that are relevant to the issue?

What do we know about the current realities and evolving dynamics of children's librarianship that are relevant to this issue?

What do we know about the capacity and strategic position of ALSC that are relevant to this issue?

I will use this format for other “consent” items requiring online Board attention, with the caveat that without “urgency” I open the consent for 2-3 days. The big ask of you in this scenario is the 24 hour turnaround, in order for us to respond quickly with these statements.

I invite your thoughts in order to proceed to a consensus on this matter. Please add your comments, even if stating simply agreement, as soon as possible and by morning of Friday Feb 3rd at the latest, when our other vote closes.

Vicky, good point; I would exclude weekends from the turnaround period. I would like to have a certain amount of flexibility, so that for instance if I can post by noon Pacific Friday I would give you till noon Pacific Monday... I do realize that by 1-2 Friday my time I can't count on you all seeing a message until Monday.

I also agree. Thanks to Nina for thinking this through so clearly and articulating it so well. I, too, love the idea of being able to be more "nimble." And thanks to Vicky for thinking of the weekend caveat.

Voted that: ALSC endorses "The Library's Role in Protecting Teen Privacy: a YALSA position paper" and will work with existing ALSC committees to communicate to our members and other youth services library staff the knowledge and strategies to uphold the rights to privacy of those we serve." - See more at: http://connect.ala.org/node/262857#comments

Thank you also for the agreement on a process for a online passage of consent items, with urgency when needed.